my cobra beat a zo6.....bad

[Street Lethal]

No because your 92 is still just some turbo'd 6. And how exactly is it in autocrossing? How well does it handle? Unless I missed the Memo the GT40 was not simply made to go in a straight line?

Again, more incoherent babble disguised as some coherent point. WHo said anything about handling, and autocrossing? Maybe if you took the time to read my first few posts, you'd see that I admitted had we'd gone any further, in relation to top speed, the GT40 would have eventually flew right by me. It's apparent that your reading comprehension is indeed no better than your math lmao...

I don't see how the whole reason why it was called the GT40 was that it was 40 inches from the ground, now it no longer is, so it is simply called the GT. How that is nonsense I'm not quite sure, but I guess if I was as ignorant as you I would find a way of justifying it.

Irrelevant. I could post many more articles depicting the car as the return of the GT40, even before it's introduction, and you'll still insist that you are right, and everyone else is wrong. I've stated from the beginning of my post that I myself refer to it as the GT40, quite frankly because that was Ford's original intent the whole entire time (lets not forget that you were a mere fourteen years old when the idea of it's rebirth was brought to light, but somehow you miraculously know Ford's agenda during that particular time, don't you lol)....

If if if, you know what all that adds up to? Nothing Until you run it, what you COULD run doesn't mean jack-shit, guess you were one of those kids that watched F&F and said yeah thats right he almost had him! haha!

As far as I'm concerned, those little warnings underneath your description depict "what" you really are, a complete and total moron who doesn't know his @ss from his elbow. As far as what I "could" run, heh, don't make me laugh. Remember something, kid, tis better to keep your mouth shut and have everyone think you are stupid, than to open it, and underline it for them lol...

[Street Lethal]

Thanks for proving my point.

Proving your point? What planet do you live on LMAO? You enlargen those words to clarify your argument, yet you ignore the words that follow it? Allow me to reiterate for you;

The new GT40, created by Ford's "Living Legends" studio, is more than 18 inches longer and stands nearly four inches taller than the original. Yet, despite being physically larger, it's unmistakably a GT40, an automotive statement of passion, speed and performance.

Ignorance is bliss, isn't it...

[shady milkman]

this is fun and all but lets keep this thread on track.

[Street Lethal]

this is fun and all but lets keep this thread on track.

In reference to Pythias, there are much better ways in getting one's points across during a discussion. He could have easily shot me a PM if he wished to discuss this matter even further, but he chose to make an example of himself, here.

[Pythias]

In reference to Pythias, there are much better ways in getting one's points across during a discussion. He could have easily shot me a PM if he wished to discuss this matter even further, but he chose to make an example of himself, here.

I figured it'd be more fun to make you look like a moron infront of everyone.

Why did I bring up handling? Maybe because you brought up the price of the vehicle? Yes your vehicle may run as fast as it for a much cheaper price, but for the price of the GT you are not simply getting a strictly oriented drag vehicle are you? Oh no, you're not.

And my points are irrelevent? Thats a matter of opinion.

And it's ignorant of me to point out what you COULD'VE run doesn't mean anything UNTIL you've run it? Haha okkkk

[Street Lethal]

I figured it'd be more fun to make you look like a moron infront of everyone...

Your words are complete and utter fluff, if only you realized how idiotic you sound. Do you have anything at all to contribute to this website whatsoever, as opposed to making ridiculous claims? Your argument is that one shouldn't call the new Ford "GT", the GT40... and yet, it has since escalated into something entirely different. Your a pathetic joke.

Why did I bring up handling? Maybe because you brought up the price of the vehicle? Yes your vehicle may run as fast as it for a much cheaper price, but for the price of the GT you are not simply getting a strictly oriented drag vehicle are you?

What does this have to do with calling the GT, the GT40? Do you hear yourself? Yes, thank you for underlining it again, you are a complete moron! You sound like a pathetic Import enthusiast, in which immediately jumps to "rallying" ability when their precious STI succumbs to a street loss. Who cares about the "GT's" handling ability, that had absolutely nothing to do with the encounter that I embellished...

And my points are irrelevent? Thats a matter of opinion...

Aren't they? You emphatically demanded that the "GT" should not be called the GT40, simply because 'you' say so. You ass-u-me that my '92 does not run the numbers that it does, without even running against it. You throw in the GT40's handling ability and all out road dominance in the attempt to justify your ridiculous argument, when in fact I simply raced his car from stop light to stop light. Irrelevant points on your behalf? Indeed...

[Raoul-Duke]

i dunno who said what but if you look at the "FORD GT" it says "FORD GT"...its not the gt40....not the one that raced in the LeMans in the 60's...not the ferrari killer....ITS JUST THE FORD GT

[shady milkman]

i dunno who said what but if you look at the "FORD GT" it says "FORD GT"...its not the gt40....not the one that raced in the LeMans in the 60's...not the ferrari killer....ITS JUST THE FORD GT

not all gt40s ran in lemans..there were some street cars..mostly in brittan tho. We all know that on the car it says gt, but as stated around 100 times now ford wanted to call it the GT40..yes that is right they wanted to call the GT the GT40. thats why they designed it to mimick the 60's gt40 in almost everyway, but since GULF owns the gt40 name they had to drop the 40 from the name. but all the designers, the suits and the people on the assembly line refer to it as a gt40. so i hope this sorta clears shit up. They could have called the gt the escort2..but what does it look like? and what was it created to celebrate and commemorate? the gt40.

[djvaly]

I'm reading the Dec '06 issue of "Car and Driver". there's the new Mustang beast coming out. FR500GT..

engine: DOHC 32-valve 534 bhp @7100hp, torque 440 lb-ft @ 5300

times:
0-60: 3.9 sec
1/4 mi: 12.1 sec

top speed: about 200mi/hr
fuel: 100 octane
weight: 3300 lbs
tranny: 6 speed sequential

and now the kicker: price: $225,000
finally they got the engine and weight about right, but look at the freaking price.. uhhh

[Street Lethal]

They could have called the gt the escort2..but what does it look like? and what was it created to celebrate and commemorate? the gt40...

Shady is absolutely correct. The car looks identicle to the original concept, and with hundreds of articles written by GT40 enthusiast's referring to it as such, well, I honestly don't know what to tell those who refuse to let such an argument go...

[Roastem]

Throwing the "40" nomenclature on the end of the original car designation was pure stupidity. That is like calling my car a Z18 because it has 18" wheels. What if I wanted dubs? I guess it will be a Z22 then!

Ford GT is simple and effective, and it doesn't limit the future vehicles of its breed to a single dimension.

Nissan does it too. Except they usually go with engine size, 350Z/3.5 L engine, etc.

What a pack of dipsh*ts.

[mrr23]

ok ,this one is getting old. and way off of the original topic.